I've been considering possible ways of combining "shopping list" method of character creation with free-form traits. Here's my current concept.

Each player has a number of points/dice/slots/whatever. He or she can assign them to descriptive free-form traits in two ways:

a). Define a trait he or she really wants his or her character to have and simply add it to the sheet.

b). Define a trait he or she would really want to see in play and add it to the "trait shop".

Anyone other than the creator can pick a trait from the shop and add it to one's own or NPC's character sheet. This gives the author of the trait a resource spendable later in play, in an amount based on the value of the trait (also, traits given to NPCs are worth more). If two or more players want the same trait, its creator chooses who gets it.

Now, I'd like the "trait shop" to remain after character creation and gradually grow along with the game's progress. I think it's important to retaining the whole "shopping list" feel. Probably, some restrictions on the number of traits that could be bought in a given unit of play would be in place, to make instantly emptying the shop impossible. Or, maybe simply later in play one actually need to pay for these traits with a resource, and possibly choosing traits from the shop gives some discount aside from converting the cost into the resource for the original creator.

Either way, the problem. It doesn't play out very well in my head. Namely, I think it could result in a somewhat unnatural character growth. One of the reasons I like DitV-style freeform traits is that they allow for an accurate reflection of character's personal changes. A public pool of traits that could be taken by anybody probably wouldn't work too well with non-generic options, and it kind of undermines the concept. Technically, there's no reason it couldn't be combined with player-defined personal developments, but still, I feel something's not right here.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Filip,

Would the characters seem like more natural constructs if they were built upon some kind of core structure?

What if each character had Story Engine style Attributes: Matter, Mind, Spirit, Chaos. And when the player chooses a Trait, they have to assign it to one of the Attributes. So, a "Girlfriend" Trait assigned to Matter is a qualitatively different factor in the character's life than a "Girlfriend" assigned to Spirit.

Paul

Can you describe what you see is the "natural" form of character growth using this system? Given sufficiently imaginative players, why is it you see that the character growth process stagnating without what you have termed, 'generic options'?

From what I've seen in your blurb, I think I could really get behind this idea of allowing the players to constantly refine there character by adding new/more descriptors to a pool for everybody playing to draw upon.

Paul,

With your suggestion it seems neither more nor less natural to me  - it just sounds more structured.

To be more clear on what I see as personal/generic (though general would be a better word, I suppose), and as natural character growth:

General trait would be something that just about any character in the game could have rather than something tailored specifically for the character. In most older games, lists of skills, merits, flaws, feats and what have you where general. It didn't made inherently less sense for a character not to have one, as the character was defined by the generic blocks he was created from.

What I refer to as personal here is the opposite. These would be traits tailored for the character and originating from this specific character. Something individual, that makes a lot of sence for him or her, but would be probably rather out of context on another character's sheet.

In DitV, for example, things like I'm a good shot or [I'm a Dog are pretty much general. Achievement trait is not, however, and most of the traits the character gains from Fallout are not. Trait like I've killed a man for stealing a piece of bread would be out of context on another character's sheet. It's originates from a very specific event in fiction rather than a general set of descriptors you'd expect characters in this setting to have.

Keys in TSoY are not exactly the same as descriptive traits, but they are a good measure. Keys from the standard or setting specific list, are general. Key of Bloodlust or Key of Glittering Gold are good examples. Keys that need some specifications, like Key of Unrequited Love or Key of the Mission are somwhere on the border. Custom Keys created specifically for one character, like Key of Little Green Rock I Have Found Near The Stream Last Spring would be stricktly personal.

An example of growth that wouldn't seem natural: you slaughter a hundred samurai, without even a scratch, in a single evening and you add a trait I like sake. Or, a trait like I'm a resilient fighter (since despite it was combat and you showcased your skill, you wasn't hit and therefore didn't prove your resistance).

An example of growth that would seem natural: you salughter a hundred samurai, without even a scratch, in a single evening. Standing over their bodies you sweep the sweath of your forehead and whisper "That was a long evening... I'd drink some sake." And then, you add I'd drink some sake as a trait. Or, you take Without a scratch or the like.

Now, I'd like to have both personal and general traits in the game (the assumption is that the characters will be defined pretty descriptively). "Trait shop" won't be the only source of new traits available, probably, so it doesn't necessarily need to the source of personal traits. And there's no problem with having a pool of both types of traits during character creation - i.e. at this point there is no story context, and the players can combine just about any traits to create interesting characters.

However, later in play having traits phrased in a more personal manner would be counter-productive - I can see how it could limit their availability greatly. Also, they wouldn't originate from a natural development of events - rather, they'd have to be matched to the way events develop. I don't see such problems with more general traits, but at the same time I'm not sure whether having a special pool of them only would actually add anything later in the game.

I've been pondering the problem, and actually, now I see one possible way to deal with the issue. It basically boils down to the right approach to phrasing the traits. Specifically, they'd have to be phrased in such a way that they could be potentially appropriate for all the characters, covering things that would be likely to be experieced by anyone in the game, given the immediate story context. Things like I was the first to learn the demon's secret or I bravely fought with a hundred samurai.

Obviously, these could probably drive play pretty strongly. By adding such a trait to the "trait shop" the player would effectively flag a course of events he'd like to see. I think this could be interesting. But for the same reason, I'm not perfectly sure whether this would be the best solution - I haven't yet decided whether I want traits to so strongly drive play forward (as opposed to reflecting what happens in play).

Hmm, possibly, I'm drifting into contradictions now.

Hmm, I'll clarify my design reasons for considering DitV-style descriptive traits and the "trait shop".

Descriptive player-defined traits, as I see it, result in more vivid characters (i.e. the player has more role-playing hooks on the sheet, and they need too get some exposition to be mechanically useful). Strong character color and vividness would be very important in the game in question.

Also, they make it easier to use the game for different genres than a rigid list of character components, and the game in question is supposed to be multi-genre (in fact, I want it to handle various strange mashups well).

As for the "trait shop" I'd expect it to have a number of effects:

-It should invite the players to integrate their concepts with stuff they didn't come up on their own, resulting in various unexpected characters and a general sense of freshness. This ties to the whole mashups thing.

-It should slightly help in getting at the same page as far as general expectations and genre conventions are concerned (i.e. there's no point to add traits that nobody would consider).

-It should give the player a sense of authorship in relation to other players' characters, consequently building his or her interest in the areas of the fiction that otherwise wouldn't be of such concern.

-I want there to be the sense of building the characters from a set of options, rather than the pressure to come up with everything on one's own. At the same time, I don't want to make the latter entirely impossible.